“This week, Apple Computer is launching a campaign to sell a new product, the $499 Mac Mini, that portends to transform the world in a way the original Mac didn’t. But Republicans will be needed for the campaign to succeed,” David Hill writes for The Hill. “To research this column, I read lots of discussion boards all across the Internet, and it’s evident that politics still play a role in computer purchases. Just as there are red states and blue states, there are also Mac Democrats and PC Republicans. These battles were especially nasty after Apple went public with its politics and added Al Gore to its board of directors.”

Hill writes, “Apple’s leader, Steve Jobs, seems to have sensed last year that his company was getting too ‘political.’ He backed off some of his campaigning for John Kerry and cryptically signaled to The Wall Street Journal’s Walt Mossberg in an interview that he understands the problem. ‘People have said that I shouldn’t get involved politically because probably half our customers are Republicans — maybe a little less … [but] I do point out that there are more Democrats than Mac users so I’m going to just stay away from all that political stuff because that was just a personal thing,’ Jobs said.”

“There are, in fact, devoted Republican Macintosh users, but that is not the perception. So Apple desperately needs to introduce a replacement image to achieve the original Mac’s vision. There would be no better way to do this than to add a Republican or two to Apple’s board of directors. Mac users such as Karl Rove or Arnold Schwarzenegger adviser Mike Murphy would be possibilities, but Rush Limbaugh is the most obvious choice. Rush is an ardent Mac evangelist and knows a thing or two about marketing. Even if Limbaugh is not put on Apple’s board, the company should market through his daily radio program, paying Rush to tout his favorite computer the same way he builds mattress sales for Select Comfort,” Hill writes.

Thank You for supporting MacDailyNews!

10 Comments

Not a bad idea. Ole Rush is a true Mac Evangalista and a great promoter of Macs on his program. Playing to both sides of the political spectrum is always advantagous.
Besides he is on loan from GOD and that can’t hurt.

It’s true– he’d be very effective. People have problems seeing that much of what he says is meant to “stir the pot,” though. He angers many because they fail to see how he illustrates absurdity with absurdity. Hence the controversy.

Anyway, he’d sell a ton. Rush basically made Snapple before it was bought out. He made Breathe-Right strips. There are other products, as well. For years he speaks of great products and people respond. I’d love to see what he could do to the Apple market.

Many influential business leaders lean to the right, even if they speak otherwise. He’d have some sway.

Another conservative talk show host that is a big Mac fan is Glenn Beck. He’s always talking about his iPod and his Macs. He makes his show available to download (in MP3 format) to those that subscribe to his Insider service. He was a primary reason I picked up an iPod…well, that and the fact I am a technology hog.

Steve Jobs is too liberal for Rush to have on board or Rush is too conservative for Steve Jobs to be on board. Can you imagine the seething between Rush and Gore across the tables. Not going to happen.

It seems like Hill is essentially saying that a person will choose a specific computer based on something as unrelated as politics, race, religion, sexual preference, etc…, instead of thinking about the product itself. Perhaps I am out of touch with the current state of politics and consumer choices, but I can’t see how a person would make their computer choice based on political affiliation instead of on product quality and affordability.

I’d rather Apple spent time advertising the product itself instead of trying to sell through politics.

1. Even though I’m a pretty staunch conservative–and sometimes even a Republican–I’m pretty sure that putting Rush on the board of Apple in order to sell Apples is a ridiculous idea.

The writer’s suggestion completely contradicts Jobs’s instinct–which is a pretty good sign that it is a bad idea.

Jobs chose not to link his products excessively with politics, because doing that will only polarize the potential market and alienate potential customers.

Jobs is right. I disagree with Jobs on many things politically, but he earns my business by providing leadership to a company that makes the best computer products. The second he makes Apple more about politics than products, he will lose a large chunk of his customers. And I suspect his products will lose their luster as well.

2. The notion that there is a link between a persons’ choice of platform and his or her politics is spurious.

Is Bill Gates a conservative to Steve Jobs’s liberal? Antitrust issues aside, I’ve seen no evidence of this.

Pres. Bush has been spotted using a PowerBooks. More recently, he has been pictured with his iPod. I also hear Karl Rove loves his Mac. Are Pres. Bush and Rove closet liberals?

Sen. Kerry also has been seen using Macs.

All this means is that our brightest leaders think Macs are superior. But then, that just opens another can of worms… ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />

I love the idea that somebody posted a few months ago that Apple should make a commercial featuring both Al Gore and Rush Limbaugh. Have them arguing about something then have them both pull out PowerBooks to illustrate their ideas. They then have a “moment” but then continue to argue. Fade-out to an Apple Logo and the words Disagree Different.

Businesses that use politics for advantage without publicly impacting the polarizing effects are the winners – Jobs stepping the company back from the same positioning as his personal beliefs speaks volumes. Steve can vote any way he wants, just drive the business to make sure there is enough product for both the blue and the red in the marketplace.